qsort

79 ms·

661.
by qsort 4y ago
90% of the problems can be solved by not fucking up your data, modeling your tables correctly, and a SQL query. Of the 10% that can't be solved that way, 90% are solved with data cleaning + a linear model. Of the 1% that can't be
662.
by qsort 4y ago
It doesn't mean I have to accept that it's the computer's fault, though. Forcing them to take responsibility for their own decision is not naive, it's the counter to that strategy.
663.
by qsort 4y ago
Data drift is a problem regardless of the model/prediction task. Which is why models should be monitored in production, something everyone agrees is important, but nobody actually does. It's a new era for "computer says no&qu
664.
by qsort 4y ago
The real question is what else you don't know if you don't even know that... The power series definition of the exponential function is basic mathematics, and is widely used in financial modeling. This cowboy attitude towards math
665.
by qsort 4y ago
That series is the definition of the exponential function, literally high-school math. As I said depends on the role. Normal SWE? Sure, it's trivia and a rather stupid question. For a more science-y or finance role, I'd be very co
666.
by qsort 4y ago
Does anyone have a good non-gaming use case for Haxe? It feels very nice to have multiple compilation targets and the language is great, but I never found an excuse to use it.
667.
by qsort 4y ago
Sure, but the point is that 180 wouldn't make sense even if the test were perfect. There aren't enough humans on earth for that many standard deviations to exist in the first place. 180 IQ could as well be 2000 IQ, the sky is the
668.
by qsort 4y ago
> For the 'e' question They were just expecting exp(x) = \sum_{i=0}^{\inf} \frac{x^i}{i!}. Depending on the role it might be useless trivia, but it's not exactly an impossibly high bar tbh.
669.
by qsort 4y ago
The gist of the idea is of course correct, but if you actually do this, please use an actual normality test . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro–Wilk_test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson
670.
by qsort 4y ago
It's a popular set of packages for data analysis in R. Similar to Python, it's an interpreted language with compiled libraries that do most of the heavy lifting.
671.
by qsort 4y ago
It doesn't require you to commit to all of its features, that's certainly correct. But it does require you to commit to its principles ; if you're needlessly passing naked pointers around, you're really writing C code w
672.
by qsort 4y ago
Always been the case. The problem isn't the existence of signal. Even 4chan has signal. The problem is the noise-to-signal ratio.
673.
by qsort 4y ago
People write C in C++ because they don't actually know C++ and think it's "basically C with classes and strings". There are legitimate reasons why someone would rather write C, but "I don't understand RAII&quot
674.
by qsort 4y ago
ISO C and ISO C++ also technically cost money.
675.
by qsort 4y ago
> I’d like to imagine the non technical folks using something like the dashboard example in the article would be ok with some extra work formatting their query to ensure what they think they want, is precisely what they’re asking for. Th
676.
by qsort 4y ago
Natural language to SQL is a classical AI task at this point. The goal is not to make something for developers, who will likely prefer SQL or a DSL regardless, but to craft tools that can be handed out to business people without developers
677.
by qsort 4y ago
The hard part of course is that genuinely new notation (i.e. not just a more convenient way to write the same thing as before) requires genuinely new mathematics to go along with it. People had been doing derivatives (at least sort of) befo
678.
by qsort 4y ago
What never ceases to amaze me when reading ancient mathematics is how much harder everything is without proper notation. For example, you don't have rational numbers, so you are forced to represent everything as awkward sums. Even comp
679.
by qsort 4y ago
I... just can't. I work a lot with data, so it sounds like it should be a good fit for what I do, but I find that writing the damn code in a normal language is much more productive. Maybe it's my brain that's wired wrong, but
680.
All the World's a Stage(en.wikipedia.org)
1 points by qsort 4y ago|0 comments
681.
by qsort 4y ago
Promoveatur ut amoveatur, a time-tested strategy.
682.
by qsort 4y ago
This sounds like an incredibly obvious observation? Modern liberal democracy comes from the revolutions in the 17th and 18th centuries. Greek poleis were at most an inspiration, like the ancient Olympics for the modern ones.
683.
by qsort 4y ago
I agree. I similar arguments ("just write examples") a lot, and I really don't get that. Finding a comprehensive set of examples for code, regexps, shell, whatever is very, very hard.
684.
by qsort 4y ago
Just so that you know, your problem is called "regular expression synthesis", there's vast literature on it and a LLM is by no means necessary. https://arts.units.it/retrieve/handle/11368/275895
685.
by qsort 4y ago
IME a database does not algorithmically improve anything, but it does make at your disposal some very efficient data structures that are definitely nontrivial to replicate. This is especially the case if you have to work with datasets that
686.
by qsort 4y ago
Well, okay, but you're running into the same problem with memory, and I could invoke the space variant of the theorem. You could say that an infinite family of GPT-like models with increasing context size collectively form a Turing-com
687.
by qsort 4y ago
> Turing complete This cannot possibly be true. The architecture is feedforward, which implies it answers each query in an amount of time bounded by some function. By the time-hierarchy theorem there exist computable functions with arbit
688.
by qsort 4y ago
> Writing a spec is a problem that can be broken down into sub-problems and so on. Yes, a.k.a. programming. If you assume that you have a machine powerful enough to do that, then you have a machine powerful enough to do anything at all:
689.
by qsort 4y ago
The last point is neither right nor wrong, it's fanfiction. The second point is wrong. You can automatically synthesize code from a specification (and you could already do so before LLMs, arguably even better with SMT solvers), but
690.
by qsort 4y ago
> I ask: tell me about c++’s std::move() Honest question: what do you expect the answer to be? Pedantically, the "correct" answer is that it statically casts its argument to an xvalue. Is this a way to tell if the candidate und

More ›